Alphabeta Math
Pipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Group Cohomology as a Derived Functor — Examples

1 · Prerequisites

2 · Summary

Concrete calculations for the conventions and comparison theorems on the companion page.

3 · Logical flowchart

4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs

None yet.

5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements

ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Group cohomology of the trivial group

Example

For every abelian group M, H0(1;M)=M and Hn(1;M)=0 for n>0.

Verification

Given: The trivial group and normalized cochains.

1.1

Degree zero cochains are M, while every positive normalized bar is zero because its only group entry is 1.

given
2.1

The normalized complex is M in degree zero and zero above it, proving the computation.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Degree-zero invariants and coinvariants

Example

Let C2=t act on M=Z by tm=m. Then H0(C2;M)=0 and H0(C2;M)=Z/2.

Verification

Given: The sign action of C2 on Z.

1.1

Fixed points satisfy m=m, hence m=0 in Z.

given
2.1

Coinvariants quotient by tmm=2m, hence are Z/2; degree-zero recovery identifies these with the two asserted groups.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06Open item page →

The first bar differentials

Example

The first faces are d(g0,g1)=(g1)(g0) and d(g0,g1,g2)=(g1,g2)(g0,g2)+(g0,g1).

Verification

Given: Alternating face deletion.

1.1

Substitution in the definition yields the two displayed formulas and d(g0)=0.

given
2.1

Applying d to the three terms of the second formula produces each vertex twice with opposite signs, explicitly illustrating d2=0.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Normalizing an inhomogeneous cochain

Example

If z:GM is a 1-cocycle, then z(1)=0, so it is already normalized.

Verification

Given: A 1-cocycle z, so z(gh)=z(g)+gz(h).

1.1

Set g=h=1 to get z(1)=z(1)+z(1).

given
2.1

Subtracting z(1) gives z(1)=0. Thus the normalized representative is z itself.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06Open item page →

A periodic resolution for a finite cyclic group

Example

For Cm=t, the augmented complex with alternating maps t1 and N=1+t++tm1 is a free periodic resolution of Z.

Verification

Given: The group ring Z[Cm].

1.1

(t1)N=N(t1)=tm1=0, so this is a complex.

given
2.1

Writing an element as aiti shows kerε=(t1)Z[Cm], ker(t1)=NZ[Cm], and kerN=(t1)Z[Cm]. Hence it is exact and every term is free.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06Open item page →

Cohomology of a finite cyclic group

Example

For Cm=t and a left Cm-module M, put N=1+t++tm1. Then H0(Cm;M)=ker(t1), and for q0, H2q+1(Cm;M)=kerN/(t1)M,H2q+2(Cm;M)=ker(t1)/NM.

Verification

Given: The periodic free resolution.

1.1

Applying HomZ[Cm](,M) identifies every cochain group with M; the coboundaries alternate between t1 and N.

given
2.1

Taking kernel modulo preceding image gives exactly the displayed groups, including the degree-zero kernel.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06Open item page →

Shapiro lemma for the trivial subgroup

Example

For an abelian group M and H=1, Hn(G;Coind1GM)=0 and Hn(G;Ind1GM)=0 for n>0.

Verification

Given: The two Shapiro isomorphisms with H=1.

1.1

Induction and coinduction from 1 are respectively Z[G]M and HomZ(Z[G],M).

given
2.1

Shapiro identifies their positive (co)homology with positive (co)homology of the trivial group, which vanishes.

step 1.1
CounterexampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06Open item page →

The underlying bar contraction is not equivariant

Statement refuted

The identity-insertion contraction of homogeneous bars is G-equivariant for every group G.

Counterexample

Given: A group G with h1 and the bar generator (1).

1.1

The contraction has s(1)=(1,1), so hs(1)=(h,h).

given
2.1

But s(h(1))=s(h)=(1,h), which differs from (h,h). Thus equivariance fails.

step 1.1
ExampleConstruction: Literature-sourcedVerification: AI-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-06 rests on unproved material (inherited)Open item page →
Rests on 3 statements not proved in this library, by way of the results it cites. This item cites no such statement directly; it depends on results that do. The unproved premises it inherits are Cohen's first model: an infinite Dedekind-finite set of reals, Sierpiński 1947: the generalised continuum hypothesis implies the Axiom of Choice and The continuum hypothesis and its generalisation are independent of ZFC. Each is recorded with a citation to the literature and is not established here, because the track that would prove it has not yet been developed in this library. Everything else in this proof is proved here.

Cohomological dimensions of 1 and Z

Example

cdZ(1)=0 and cdZ(Z)=1.

Verification

Given: Z[Z]=Z[t,t1].

1.1

The trivial module for 1 is free, so its projective dimension is zero. For Z, 0Z[t,t1]t1Z[t,t1]Z0 is a free resolution.

given
2.1

With trivial coefficients Z, applying Hom sends t1 to zero, so H1(Z;Z)=Z0. Hence the resolution length one is minimal.

step 1.1

Sources